ohai Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The point is that any responses here will just be wild speculation.
ohai Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ohai Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > The point is that any responses here will just > be wild speculation. You could just post “nothing to add” if you can’t produce a counterpoint.
I’m just saying that your “reading behind the lines” is also based on a lot of assumptions.
Series of events: 1) Random misguided individual comes to us for help 2) Individual posts purposely opaque data 3) We do what we can with it (as requested), which means reading between lines. This requires assumptions. 4) Poster initially corrects two insignificant interpretations, indicating that if other data were wrong she would do the same. 5) I don’t think most of the assumptions we made have been such major leaps from the data given. It could always turn out that she’s a Steeler’s Cheerleader and her high performance coworker is Ben Rapelsberger, but I deem this unlikely.
Black Swan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > It could always turn out that she’s a Steeler’s > Cheerleader and her high performance coworker is > Ben Rapelsberger, but I deem this unlikely. The last of the Steelerettes is likely pushing 60 by now, so to deem it unlikely is a good call.
“SHE” is in a sleep mode
muddahudda Before making generalizations about the behavior of women in the workplace it is important to consider the fact that in our society it is normally expected that males intiate the ‘courtship’ process. Therefore it is only reasonable to assume that women are subject to far more unwanted advances then men are.
Valores Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But guys who hit on all girls they see are nasty, > like those dogs who try to mount all the dogs from > the neighborhood. They shouldn’t work in finance > © yo son! i gots low self esteem and im looking for validation wherever I can get it.
bodhisattva Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > muddahudda > > Before making generalizations about the behavior > of women in the workplace it is important to > consider the fact that in our society it is > normally expected that males intiate the > ‘courtship’ process. Therefore it is only > reasonable to assume that women are subject to far > more unwanted advances then men are. This is sexist - you are making generalisations about a whole gender. Why should males inititiate anything in an equal world. I am reporting you to HR.
Muddahudda Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > bodhisattva Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > muddahudda > > > > Before making generalizations about the > behavior > > of women in the workplace it is important to > > consider the fact that in our society it is > > normally expected that males intiate the > > ‘courtship’ process. Therefore it is only > > reasonable to assume that women are subject to > far > > more unwanted advances then men are. > > > This is sexist - you are making generalisations > about a whole gender. Why should males inititiate > anything in an equal world. > > I am reporting you to HR. Agreed - it’s so bigoted of you to think women can’t initiate relationships. You just set te womens movement back 50 years and hr should put you on final written warning.
the world is not equal and you’re both goofs.
I don’t believe in giving up and I wouldn’t hire a guy that does either. Kudos to him… even if he is a jerk. The majority of people (women and men) will respect that kind of character a lot more than your average crusading whistle-blower. On top of that he is also a high performer and life of the party? Yikes, you’re pushing crap uphill there. I’m sympathetic, original poster, to your predicament, but it is almost never advantageous to do what you did. It might be heroic, sometimes, but it will almost never benefit you.
Black Swan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Ok, I’m going to try to squeak in a few points > before this thread blows up. > > 1) Never place yourself in a position where you > are aligned against a “high performance coworker” > unless you know you are percieced as even higher > performance. Surest way to get burned. > > 2) Never get involved in other people’s politics > (advances were not made on you) > > 3) Never involve others in your politics (people > from other departments who are not involved). > This looks VERY bad. > > 4) Always be an adult and go to someone with your > problems directly instead of running around to > every one else. You never had the balls to > address this coworker in person but you did run > around their back to other departments and even HR > (indirectly). > > 5) Never bring what happens at the bar back to the > office… ever. If you don’t like it, stay out of > the bar and keep your nose in your own business. > > 6) You weren’t there so you’re working off second > hand accounts. Never work off second hand > accounts. > > 7) Never violate the above rules, never be a drama > queen by making events that don’t effect you your > business. This is just absolutely disgusting advice. Please do not follow it. I worked at Lehman, so trust me, I know all about sexual harassment. Unfortunately, I don’t have a clear cut solution for you, but I do know bad advice when I see it. This is what is wrong with the world, with our industry. The “it doesn’t affect me so it isn’t my problem” attitude. It absolutely disgusts me, that people would sit back and watch a fellow human being be wronged, humiliated and degraded. P.S. Rule 5) gave me the most laughs. Thank you for dictating where one may wander.
1st off most of the people who responded agreed with the advice. 2nd, I don’t think working at any one firm makes you an expert on sexual harrasment unless maybe you work for Playboy. 3rd, I was trying to be constructive, trying to protect her job. I think it’s ironic that a lawyer would come down here crapping on our industry’s lack of integrity. But you’re right, you’ll probably be the first lawyer of all time to never find themselves on the side of a questionable client. For someone so full of God-like integrity you worked at that cluster-f*ck of animocity and sexual harrasment (according to you) called Lehman (if it’s so bad, why were you working there? Isn’t that implicitely endorsing the activity? I guess it’s ok as long as your check clears.). You then chose to take the high road by becoming a lawyer. Give me a break you self rightous d-bag.
MiserableLawStdnt Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- please stfu when you get a chance. you worked at a bank so you *know* about sexual harassment??? how about working at hooters? or a sportsbar? your lack of *know* is beyond evident as is your miserable attitude.
So that’s what drove Lehman out of business. It was the sex.
Probably not the response the OP was expecting. It’s a rough world out there for woman. The hot ones get hit on and the not-hot ones get no flowers on Valentine’s Day. If you were feeling harassed a stern “Hey I don’t appreciate that” probably would do the trick with most guys. I imagine people who feel they are harassed just keep it to themselves which sends the message to the Alpha Male that nothing he is doing is wrong further escalating the problem.
should we push this thread to the limit?
ohai Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So that’s what drove Lehman out of business. It > was the sex. or lack thereof. i heard mrs. lehman was colder than giving a polar bear a wedgie.
she’s a white chick working for Lehman in Japan, that tells you everything right there